Sign up to receive free email alerts when patent applications with chosen keywords are publishedSIGN UP

Abstract:

A wagering system has a processor through which information regarding a
plurality of competing contestants in a horse or dog race is made
available to entities betting on the outcome of the race to seek a payout
from a wagering pool. The information for at least one of the competing
contestants is prepared based upon selected handicapping criteria to give
the at least one of the competing contestants a time adjusted race
identity. An input is provided for wagers to be placed on the race. The
outcome of the race for wagering purposes is determined using the time
adjusted race identity for the at least one of the competing contestants.

Claims:

1. A wagering system comprising: a processor through which information
regarding a plurality of competing contestants in a horse or dog race is
made available to entities betting on the outcome of the race to seek a
payout from a first wagering pool, the information for at least one of
the competing contestants prepared based upon selected handicapping
criteria to give the at least one of the competing contestants a time
adjusted race identity; and an input for wagers to be placed on the race,
the outcome of the race for wagering purposes determined using the time
adjusted race identity for the at least one of the competing contestants.

2. The wagering system according to claim 1 wherein at least one of the
plurality of competing contestants has a first unadjusted race identity
and those competing contestants in the plurality of competing contestants
that do not have the first unadjusted race identity have a time adjusted
race identity that is determined based upon the selected handicapping
criteria to make all of the competing contestants in the plurality of
competing contestants substantially equally likely to win the race for
wagering purposes.

3. The wagering system according to claim 1 wherein the criteria comprise
at least one of: past race performance; weather conditions; jockey or
driver; trainer; and post position.

4. The wagering system according to claim 1 wherein the wagering system
further comprises a display upon which the outcome of the race for
wagering purposes is visually identifiable for betting entities following
the race.

5. The wagering system according to claim 1 wherein the processor is
configured to accept data relative to finishing times in the race for
each of the plurality of competing contestants and use the data to
determine the outcome of the race for wagering purposes.

6. The wagering system according to claim 5 wherein the outcome of the
race for wagering purposes is identified as the calculated order of
finishing for each of the plurality of contestants and the finishing
order for the at least one competing contestant for wagering purposes is
determined by using an adjusted finishing time calculated for the at
least one of the competing contestants using an actual finishing time
adjusted by a time increment for the at least one of the contestants
based upon the selected handicapping criteria.

7. The wagering system according to claim 6 wherein each of a plurality
of the competing contestants has an adjusted finishing time, with the
adjusted finishing times compared to identify the order of finishing for
wagering purposes for each of the plurality of contestants.

8. The wagering system according to claim 1 wherein at least one of the
plurality of competing contestants has a first unadjusted race identity
with an unadjusted finishing time and the adjusted and unadjusted
finishing times are compared to identify the order of finishing for
wagering purposes for each of the plurality of contestants.

9. A method of wagering comprising: providing a processor through which
information regarding a plurality of competing contestants in a race is
made available to entities betting on the outcome of the race to seek a
payout from a first wagering pool, inputting information to the processor
relative to the competing contestants prepared based upon selected
handicapping criteria to give each of the competing contestants either a
time adjusted race identity or an unadjusted race identity, the time
adjusted race identity for each competing contestant correlated to an
adjusted finishing time at the end of the race calculated using an actual
finishing time adjusted by a time increment based upon the selected
handicapping criteria; accepting wagers from entities betting on
particular outcomes of the race; after the race is concluded, determining
a time adjusted order of finishing for wagering purposes for each of the
competing contestants by comparing the time adjusted finishing times with
actual finishing times for any of the competing contestants that have an
unadjusted race identity; and making a payout from the first wagering
pool to entities betting on the outcome of the race based upon the time
adjusted order of finishing for each of the competing contestants.

10. The method of wagering according to claim 9 further comprising the
step of displaying the time adjusted order of finishing for each of the
competing contestants.

11. The method of wagering according to claim 9 further comprising the
step of accepting additional wagers and providing additional payouts
based on the outcome of the race using a second format that is different
than a first format for determining payouts as set forth in claim 9 and
without using a time adjusted race identity for any of the competing
contestants.

12. The method of wagering according to claim 9 wherein the race is a
horse or dog race and the step of inputting information to the processor
comprises inputting information prepared based upon selected handicapping
criteria that is at least one of: past race performance; weather
conditions; jockey or driver; trainer; and post position.

13. The method of wagering according to claim 9 wherein the race is a
horse or dog race.

14. The method of wagering according to claim 9 wherein at least one of
the plurality of competing contestants has a first unadjusted race
identity and those competing contestants in the plurality of competing
contestants that do not have the first unadjusted race identity have a
time adjusted race identity that is determined based upon the selected
criteria to make all of the competing contestants in the plurality of
competing contestants substantially equally likely to win the race for
wagering purposes.

15. The method of wagering according to claim 11 wherein the first and
second formats provide payouts from the first wagering pool.

16. The method of wagering according to claim 11 wherein the first and
second formats provide payouts from separate wagering pools.

17. A method of wagering comprising: identifying a plurality of competing
contestants in a race; based upon selected handicapping criteria, giving
each of the competing contestants either a time adjusted race identity or
an unadjusted race identity, the time adjusted race identity for each
competing contestant correlated to an adjusted finishing time at the end
of the race calculated using an actual finishing time adjusted by a time
increment based upon the selected handicapping criteria; accepting wagers
from entities betting on particular outcomes of the race; determining a
time adjusted order of finishing for each of the competing contestants by
comparing the time adjusted finishing times with actual finishing times
for any of the competing contestants that have an unadjusted race
identity; and making a payout from a wagering pool to entities betting on
the outcome of the race based upon the time adjusted order of finishing
for each of the competing contestants.

18. The method of wagering according to claim 17 further comprising the
step of displaying the time adjusted order of finishing for each of the
competing contestants.

19. The method of wagering according to claim 17 further comprising the
step of accepting additional wagers and providing additional payouts
based on the outcome of the race using a second format that is different
than a first format for determining payouts as set forth in claim 17 and
without using a time adjusted race identity for any of the competing
contestants.

20. The method of wagering according to claim 17 wherein the race is a
horse or dog race and the step of inputting information to the processor
comprises inputting information prepared based upon selected handicapping
criteria that is at least one of: past race performance; weather
conditions; jockey or driver; trainer; and post position.

21. A method of wagering comprising the steps of: providing a processor
through which information regarding a plurality of competing contestants
in a race is made available to entities betting on the outcome of the
race to seek a payout; inputting information to the processor relative to
at least one competing contestant prepared based upon selected
handicapping criteria to give the at least one competing contestant a
time adjusted race identity, the time adjusted race identity for the at
least one competing contestant correlated to an adjusted finishing time
at the end of the race calculated using an actual finishing time adjusted
by a time increment based upon the selected handicapping criteria;
accepting wagers from entities betting on particular outcomes of the
race; and after the race is concluded making a payout to an entity that
places a wager that identifies separate finishing orders utilizing both:
a) the actual finishing time for the at least one competing contestant;
and b) the adjusted finishing time for the at least one competing
contestant.

Description:

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

[0001] 1. Field of the Invention

[0002] This invention relates to wagering and, more particularly, to a
wagering system and method of wagering wherein the outcome of a race, for
wagering purposes, is determined based upon comparing contestants amongst
which at least one of the contestants has a time adjusted race identity
based upon selected handicapping criteria.

[0003] 2. Background Art

[0004] Horse racing (greyhound and quarter horse racing also) has been in
decline for decades in the United States. Newer forms of gaming (casinos)
have largely replaced racing as the number one gambling pastime. Racing
is a slower paced activity in that wagers are spread out over a longer
period of time. Casino gambling is far faster paced and the application
of knowledge and skill to the games being played is simple and fast. In
contrast, racing requires a player, if he/she wants a reasonable chance
of success, to acquire a vast reservoir of knowledge and then apply that
knowledge to the past performance publication for the race in question.
This application is also time consuming. Thus, racing grew up as a slower
paced gambling product. Current simulcasting of many races may seem to
speed up the pace, but handicapping a race takes time and even if one has
5-10 races to play in 20-30 minutes, the good horse player can't process
each race fast enough. Overnight study helps but factors present at the
time of the race (track condition, track bias, weather) remain available
only at post time. Additionally, "overnight study" may not be attractive
to today's younger gambler. But a new generation gambler betting into
racing pools taking 18-35% commissions on each bet appear doomed to lose
big and can't hope to compete with expert handicappers taking the time to
do the necessary homework. Thus, these new people gave up or never
started going to the racetrack. Hence, the decline of racing occurred.
Casinos, while being faster--20 bets per minute--also have commissions
ranging from less than 1% to 3-5% on many bets.

[0005] The inventor herein devised a wagering system format as set forth
in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,888,136 and 6,152,822 to bet the races in a slot
machine format. The purpose was to put novice horse players on an even
footing with experts, increase the speed of play, unburden the player
from the need to acquire handicapping skills, and remove the long time
period necessary to handicap a race.

[0006] A primary element in the solution to bring racing into a
competitive condition with casinos is to increase the speed of play while
reducing commissions and at the same time making long periods of studying
past performance unnecessary.

[0007] For much of the 20th century baseball was the main sports
betting game in the United States. While not pari-mutuel, the baseball
betting line was expressed similarly to horse racing odds. The two teams
may be even money, or one team a 2-1 favorite. Typically, the Yankees
might be 180 over the White Sox. A Yankee bettor would put up $180 to win
$100 while a White Sox bettor would put up $100 to win $170. The $10
difference being the bookmaker "edge." This form of gambling is called
"money line wagering."

[0008] During World War II the story is, a Chicago bookmaker--nicknamed
the "Wizard of Odds"--devised the point spread. For several reasons (not
germane here) baseball does not lend itself very well to point spread
betting, though it is used today on occasion in combination with a money
line. Yet football and basketball do lend themselves spectacularly to
point spread wagering. In fact, so much so, they have greatly eclipsed
baseball in popularity in both Las Vegas and underground wagering. The
point spread effect is essentially this--it matters very little for 99%
of the people betting which side they bet. The Bears +61/2 points or the
Saints -61/2 points--either bet is mostly the same. The event can go
either way. One percent or less of the players are so expert that the
side picked does matter. For example, on a Sunday with fourteen games
going on maybe one or two will matter to the experts. The other 12-13
games really are a 50-50 proposition.

[0009] One racing format developed to spur additional interest in horse
racing is what is referred to as European "spread betting" on horse
races, also called "winning distance index." European spread betting does
use lengths won by or head or neck or multiple lengths (not time), but it
is fixed odds wagering and does not involve time handicaps. It also does
not involve placing results of all the horses but is offered by bookies
as a proposition bet whereby a bettor can win more if his horse wins by
progressively wider distances. By its nature it is complex and can only
match up horse versus horse or horse versus winning margin, and its odds
payoff while varying as to how far a winner wins by is predetermined
(fixed odds) before the contest.

[0010] The industry continues to seek out racing formats to make betting
on horse and dog racing more attractive to the overall betting
population, and particularly those less inclined to spend the time and
effort to understand the nuances of informed betting.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

[0011] In one form, the invention is directed to a wagering system
including a processor through which information regarding a plurality of
competing contestants in a horse or dog race is made available to
entities betting on the outcome of the race to seek a payout from a first
wagering pool. The information for at least one of the competing
contestants is prepared based upon selected handicapping criteria to give
the at least one of the competing contestants a time adjusted race
identity and an input for wagers to be placed on the race. The outcome of
the race for wagering purposes is determined using the time adjusted race
identity for the at least one of the competing contestants.

[0012] In one form, at least one of the plurality of competing contestants
has a first unadjusted race identity. Those competing contestants in the
plurality of competing contestants that do not have the first unadjusted
race identity have a time adjusted race identity that is determined based
upon the selected handicapping criteria to make all of the competing
contestants in the plurality of competing contestants substantially
equally likely to win the race for wagering purposes.

[0013] In one form, the criteria include at least one of: past race
performance; weather conditions; jockey or driver; trainer; and post
position.

[0014] In one form, the wagering system further includes a display upon
which the outcome of the race for wagering purposes is visually
identifiable for betting entities following the race.

[0015] In one form, the processor is configured to accept data relative to
finishing times in the race for each of the plurality of competing
contestants and use the data to determine the outcome of the race for
wagering purposes.

[0016] In one form, the outcome of the race for wagering purposes is
identified as the calculated order of finishing for each of the plurality
of contestants. The finishing order for the at least one competing
contestant for wagering purposes is determined by using an adjusted
finishing time calculated for the at least one of the competing
contestants using an actual finishing time adjusted by a time increment
for the at least one of the contestants based upon the selected
handicapping criteria.

[0017] In one form, each of a plurality of the competing contestants has
an adjusted finishing time, and the adjusted finishing times are compared
to identify the order of finishing for wagering purposes for each of the
plurality of contestants.

[0018] In one form, at least one of the plurality of competing contestants
has a first unadjusted race identity with an unadjusted finishing time.
The adjusted and unadjusted finishing times are compared to identify the
order of finishing for wagering purposes for each of the plurality of
contestants.

[0019] In one form, the invention further consists of method of wagering
comprising: providing a processor through which information regarding a
plurality of competing contestants in a race is made available to
entities betting on the outcome of the race to seek a payout from a first
wagering pool, inputting information to the processor relative to the
competing contestants prepared based upon selected handicapping criteria
to give each of the competing contestants either a time adjusted race
identity or an unadjusted race identity, the time adjusted race identity
for each competing contestant correlated to an adjusted finishing time at
the end of the race calculated using an actual finishing time adjusted by
a time increment based upon the selected handicapping criteria; accepting
wagers from entities betting on particular outcomes of the race; after
the race is concluded, determining a time adjusted order of finishing for
wagering purposes for each of the competing contestants by comparing the
time adjusted finishing times with actual finishing times for any of the
competing contestants that have an unadjusted race identity; and making a
payout from the first wagering pool to entities betting on the outcome of
the race based upon the time adjusted order of finishing for each of the
competing contestants.

[0020] In one form, the method of wagering further includes the step of
displaying the time adjusted order of finishing for each of the competing
contestants.

[0021] In one form, the method of wagering further includes the step of
accepting additional wagers and providing additional payouts based on the
outcome of the race using a second format that is different than a first
format for determining payouts and without using a time adjusted race
identity for any of the competing contestants.

[0022] In one form, the race is a horse or dog race and the step of
inputting information to the processor includes inputting information
prepared based upon selected handicapping criteria that is at least one
of: past race performance; weather conditions; jockey or driver; trainer;
and post position.

[0023] In one form, the race is a horse or dog race.

[0024] In one form, at least one of the plurality of competing contestants
has a first unadjusted race identity. Those competing contestants in the
plurality of competing contestants that do not have the first unadjusted
race identity have a time adjusted race identity that is determined based
upon the selected criteria to make all of the competing contestants in
the plurality of competing contestants substantially equally likely to
win the race for wagering purposes.

[0025] In one form, the first and second formats provide payouts from the
first wagering pool.

[0026] In one form, the first and second formats provide payouts from
separate wagering pools.

[0027] In one form, the invention is still further directed to a method of
wagering including: identifying a plurality of competing contestants in a
race; based upon selected handicapping criteria, giving each of the
competing contestants either a time adjusted race identity or an
unadjusted race identity, the time adjusted race identity for each
competing contestant correlated to an adjusted finishing time at the end
of the race calculated using an actual finishing time adjusted by a time
increment based upon the selected handicapping criteria; accepting wagers
from entities betting on particular outcomes of the race; determining a
time adjusted order of finishing for each of the competing contestants by
comparing the time adjusted finishing times with actual finishing times
for any of the competing contestants that have an unadjusted race
identity; and making a payout from a wagering pool to entities betting on
the outcome of the race based upon the time adjusted order of finishing
for each of the competing contestants.

[0028] In one form, the method of wagering includes the step of displaying
the time adjusted order of finishing for each of the competing
contestants.

[0029] In one form, the method of wagering includes the step of accepting
additional wagers and providing additional payouts based on the outcome
of the race using a second format that is different than a first format
for determining payouts and without using a time adjusted race identity
for any of the competing contestants.

[0030] In one form, the race is a horse or dog race and the step of
inputting information to the processor includes inputting information
prepared based upon selected handicapping criteria that is at least one
of: past race performance; weather conditions; jockey or driver; trainer;
and post position.

[0031] In one form, the invention further consists of method of wagering
comprising the steps of: providing a processor through which information
regarding a plurality of competing contestants in a race is made
available to entities betting on the outcome of the race to seek a
payout; inputting information to the processor relative to at least one
competing contestant prepared based upon selected handicapping criteria
to give the at least one competing contestant a time adjusted race
identity, the time adjusted race identity for the at least one competing
contestant correlated to an adjusted finishing time at the end of the
race calculated using an actual finishing time adjusted by a time
increment based upon the selected handicapping criteria; accepting wagers
from entities betting on particular outcomes of the race; and after the
race is concluded making a payout to an entity that places a wager that
identifies separate finishing orders utilizing both: a) the actual
finishing time for the at least one competing contestant; and b) the
adjusted finishing time for the at least one competing contestant.

[0032] By importing the football and wagering model into horse and dog
racing, many of the problems that have caused interest therein to
stagnate or decline would be addressed. The novice player may be put on
nearly equal footing with an expert. Play becomes very fast. Simulcasting
will then benefit racing as many decent chance bets can be made quickly
without excessive study time needed. Do all this into . . . hopefully
lowered commissions 10-11% perhaps . . . and racing could be revitalized.
The younger players want party time when gambling--not a studious,
laborious application of handicapping principals applied slowly and
carefully to each race offered. An eight horse field where the 1 is 3-5
and wins 55-60% of the time would be replaced by eight horses, ranging in
odds from 4-1 to 9-1. And all might have pretty decent chances to win.
Expert handicappers have not been abandoned, as now they can pit their
knowledge against the track handicapper who made the time handicap
morning line. Also, their expertise applied to multiple pool bets will
still stand them in good stead versus the novice players. But the novice
will still be on 97% equal footing. Now he/she has only a slim hope of
being successful without applying the traditional handicapping skills
he/she doesn't have and is not inclined to learn.

[0033] Time spread betting (hereinafter "Time Spread Betting") sets a time
handicap for each horse in the race--the race is run--all horses
contesting the race are timed. The time handicaps are then applied with
the then adjusted times determining the final order of finish for
wagering purposes of that specific pool. It doesn't matter if a horse
prevails by 1/100th second or 2 seconds, its placing is the same.
Then the pari-mutuel pools accumulated during the wagering period (during
which the bettors placed bets being aware of time handicaps to be
applied) determine the final odds on any given horse. Should that horse
prevail after time handicaps are applied, all bettors selecting that
horse win. This has no effect on purse distribution--only the raw time
finish applies to that process and time handicaps effect on the payoffs
of any other non-time spread wagering pool.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0034] FIG. 1 is a schematic representation of a wagering system according
to the present invention;

[0035] FIG. 2 is a flow diagram representation of one method of wagering,
according to the invention;

[0036] FIG. 3 is a flow diagram form showing a hybrid wagering method
including the wagering method in FIG. 2; and

[0037] FIG. 4 is a flow diagram representation of a modified form of a
method of wagering, according to the invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

[0038] A wagering system, according to the present invention, is shown at
10 in FIG. 1. The wagering system has a processor 12 through which
information regarding a plurality of competing contestants in a horse or
dog race is made available to entities betting on the outcome of the race
to seek a payout from a first wagering pool. As explained in greater
detail below, the information for at least one of the competing
contestants is prepared based upon selected handicapping criteria to give
the at least one of the competing contestants a time adjusted race
identity, for wagering purposes, as determined using the time adjusted
race identity for the at least one of the competing contestants.

[0039] An input 14, which may be configured for manual or electronic
operation, allows wagers to be placed on the race.

[0040] At least one of the plurality of competing contestants has a first
unadjusted race identity. Those competing contestants that do not have
the first unadjusted race identity have a time adjusted race identity
that is determined based upon selected handicapping criteria to make all
of the competing contestants in the plurality of competing contestants
substantially equally likely to win the race for wagering purposes.

[0041] The track handicapper will study each upcoming race and assign a
zero time handicap to the contestant (such as a horse) most likely to win
the race, in his opinion. (He/she can, if he/she wishes, assign more than
one horse the same handicap.) This horse will maintain the unadjusted
identity for the race. He/she then assigns a minus time handicap to each
other horse in the race that maintain a time adjusted identity for the
race. The theoretical goal, taking in at least one, and preferably a
plurality of factors such as form, post race performance, weather, jockey
or driver, trainer, post position, etc., is to bring all horses in the
race to a "time adjusted" eight horse dead heat (assuming eight horses in
the race). Such a race could look as follows:

[0042] The race is run. Perhaps, to keep all horses competing beyond fifth
place, 7 or 8 places should be paid with purse money instead of the
customary first 5 finishers. Purse money and any conventional pool
betting would be determined by the raw time finish. Only this special
pool bet--be it win, perfecta, trifecta, etc.--would be determined by the
adjusted time finishes using the adjusted race identities and at least
one unadjusted race identity. In harness racing a base time of 1:55 1/5
for a mile and one horse length being about 81/3 foot are taken into
account. In thoroughbred racing, a table of time with approximate
distances following, as per the above table, is based on a base time of
1:36.0 for a mile and one horse length being 81/3 foot. Since time is the
deciding factor, and all races are now timed (each horse) to 1/100th
of a second, this is the only calculating factor. An approximate
equivalent distance chart accompanies each time handicap simply to help
the patron to visualize the size of each horse's handicap.

[0043] The processor 12 is configured to accept data relative to actual
finishing times in the race for each of the competing contestants and use
the data to determine the outcome of the race for wagering purposes. As
explained above, each of the competing contestants, with the exception of
the one or more contestants that has an unadjusted race identity, has an
adjusted finishing time based upon the selected handicapping criteria.
These adjusted finishing times are compared to the actual finishing time
for the contestant(s) with the unadjusted race identity to identify the
order of finishing for wagering purposes for each of the contestants in
the race. That is, the finishing order for at least one of the competing
contestants, for wagering purposes, is determined by using an adjusted
finishing time calculated starting with an actual finishing time that is
adjusted by a time increment based upon the selected handicapping
criteria.

[0044] The wagering system 10 further has a display 14 upon which the
outcome of the race, for wagering purposes, is visually identifiable for
betting entities following the race.

[0045] In FIG. 2, a method of wagering, according to the present
invention, is shown in flow diagram form. As shown at block 16, a
processor is provided through which information regarding a plurality of
competing contestants in a race is made available to entities betting on
the outcome of the race to seek a payout from a first wagering pool.

[0046] As shown at block 18, information is input to the processor
relative to the competing contestants prepared based upon selected
handicapping criteria to give each of the competing contestants either a
time adjusted race identity or an unadjusted race identity. The time
adjusted race identity for each competing contestant is correlated to an
adjusted finishing time at the end of the race calculated using an actual
finishing time adjusted by a time increment based upon the selected
handicapping criteria.

[0047] As shown at block 20, wagers are accepted from entities betting on
particular outcomes of the race.

[0048] As shown at block 22, after the race is concluded, a time adjusted
order of finishing is determined for wagering purposes for each of the
competing contestants by comparing the time adjusted finishing times with
actual finishing times for any of the competing contestants that have an
unadjusted race identity.

[0049] As shown at block 24, a payout is made from the first wagering pool
to entities betting on the outcome of the race based upon the time
adjusted order of finishing for each of the competing contestants.

[0050] As shown at block 26, optionally the time adjusted order of
finishing is displayed for each of the competing contestants, as on a
monitor, or through electric transmission to a receiver upon which the
information can be observed.

[0051] The method, depicted in FIG. 2, is one that utilizes a system as
shown at 10 in FIG. 1, or another type of system.

[0052] As shown in FIG. 3, the invention further contemplates that
different wagering formats may be utilized, allowing bettors to make
wagers in the same race with potentially different outcomes. As shown in
FIG. 3, at block 28, wagers are accepted and payouts made as shown at
block 30 in accordance with the aforementioned method depicted in FIG. 2.
In parallel with this, wagers can be accepted, as shown at block 32 and
payouts made as shown at block 34 using a different format for
determining race outcome, be it actual or another variation.

[0053] The first and second formats may derive payouts from the same or
separate wagering pools. The percentage payouts may vary as explained
further below.

[0054] Another method wagering, according to the present invention, is
shown in flow diagram form in FIG. 4. As shown at block 36, a plurality
of competing contestants in a race are identified.

[0055] As shown at block 38, based upon selected handicapping criteria,
each of the competing contestants is assigned either a time adjusted race
identity or an unadjusted race identity. The time adjusted race identity
is correlated to an adjusted finishing time at the end of the race
calculated using an actual finishing time adjusted by a time increment
based upon the selected handicapping criteria.

[0056] As shown at block 40, wagers are accepted from entities betting on
particular outcomes of the race.

[0057] As shown at block 42, a time adjusted order of finishing is
determined for each of the competing contestants by comparing the time
adjusted finishing times with actual finishing times for any of the
competing contestants that have an unadjusted race identity.

[0058] As shown at block 44, payouts are made from a wagering pool to
entities betting on the outcome of the race based upon the time adjusted
order of finishing for each of the competing contestants.

[0059] Optionally, as shown at block 46, the time adjusted order of
finishing for each of the competing contestants may be displayed for
visual observation.

[0060] The method in FIG. 4 may likewise use a system 10 as in FIG. 1 or
an alternative form of system.

[0061] The format for accepting wagers and making payouts based upon the
outcome of a race, as in FIG. 4, may be used in parallel with another
format, as shown in FIG. 3 for the method in FIG. 2.

[0062] By constructing a time handicapped race many things are potentially
accomplished--especially for harness racing on 1/2 mile and 5/8 mile
tracks--but effective for all pari-mutuel racing on any track.

[0063] There are attractive odds (usually) on all horses in the race.
Instead of having a usual heavy favorite from an inside post position
that wins half or more of the time, a field of balanced odds is created;
all horses offering good wagering odds (probably all horses will go off
between 4-1 and 9-1 odds). The time handicaps level the playing field,
making most any result equally likely. Novice bettors are now on near
equal footing with older expert handicappers. Betting a race is made into
essentially a "live slot machine"--which does not require much skill or
time studying to handicap.

[0064] The handicapping factor is greatly reduced. This is essential in
attracting "new blood" to racing. Yet expert handicappers still get to
pit their skills against the track handicapper who makes the handicap
line. Their superior knowledge and skills in wagering into the quirky
pari-mutuel system will still provide them with some residual advantage.
An example would be wagering into a described bet (later detailed herein)
such as the twin-win, twin-perfecta, etc. Also, these experts will be
able to use Time Spread Betting as a "hedge" bet to bets made into the
conventional pools. As a short explanation, an astute bettor can lock in
profits and "middle" (win both bets or if not winning both, one bet
decreases the risk of the other . . . something analogous to buying
stocks and selling options or selling stocks and buying options.) It is
possible to win both sides at times. This aspect takes expert knowledge.

[0065] Commissions may be reduced. This applied to Time Spread Betting
would potentially prove highly successful as now these "live slot
machine"-like bets could compete with the actual slot machine
commissions. Commissions of 10-12% could work very profitably for the
pari-mutuel industry because those take outs (10-12%) are about what the
hot Vegas penny slots take out.

[0066] Play is speeded up. By de-emphasizing handicapping, speed of play
is greatly enhanced and it becomes possible for bettors to effectively
play many simulcast races very quickly. This, in combination with reduced
take out rate would greatly expand volume of pari-mutuel handle,
potentially leading to economic success.

[0067] Time Spread Betting would require certain regulatory "adjustments"
by the officials. Should a horse, in the conduct of a race, do something
that requires disqualification, then that horse would be disqualified and
the judges would place that horse behind some other horse in the race, or
last, as they so judge, just as they currently do. For the placing of
horses in Time Spread Betting, one possibility is that the offending
horse be given a time 1/100th of a second behind that horse's time
that the offending horse has been placed behind.

[0068] It is possible that a horse might be disqualified and placed behind
a horse yet still, because of its time handicap, win or be second etc. as
to placing in Time Spread Betting. However, purse considerations will
always be the placed results of the judges as to the conventional pools.

[0069] There will be many more dead heats in Time Spread Betting, as
1/100th of a second is about 51/2 inches in harness (6.6 inches in
thoroughbreds). This is no problem as dead heats easily fit into the
pari-mutuel payout system. The rare case when two or more horses are
assigned the exact same time handicap in a Time Spread Betting race and
they finish close together where they are involved in a photo finish in
the conventional race pool for purse or wagering purposes . . . then, in
that case (finishing 5-7 inches apart) for wagering purposes in the Time
Spread Betting pool, the horse might be placed ahead that actually was
ahead in the conventional photo finish photo--even though both horses are
timed identically to within 1/100th of a second. But this is now
done routinely anyway in all conventional wagering and a photo would be
produced anyway for the conventional race to be used for a more exact
placing.

[0070] Special wagering is available with Time Spread Betting. Casinos
offer "bonus rounds" on slots and side bets on table games. To compete,
the following examples might be available with Time Spread Betting. Of
course, Win-Per-Trifecta and perhaps even Superfecta and Hi five versions
could be offered as well as other possible bets. But other attractions
could be developed that would continue the de-emphasis on handicapping
allowing novices near equal footing with expert handicappers.

[0071] Twin Win Betting, version A, can be of two types: 100% carryover;
and 50-75% carryover with balance paid as consolation. (Or perhaps
alternatively 75% carried over and 25% paid to those tickets selecting
either the winner of the conventional win pool, or the winner of the Time
Spread Betting win pool.) Version B may involve one type only. Also
similarly, twin perfecta wagering or twin trifecta wagering, etc.

[0072] In casinos, both table games and slots have an extra "element".
Table games have "side bets", while slots have "Bonus Rounds." Because
"Time Spread Betting" is, in a very real way, an analogous method of
wagering to slots especially and to table games partially (less intensive
thinking), more chance than a studied skill like handicapping, there is
need for an extra "element"--such as "Twin Win Betting". It works as
follows: as an example with a win pool for Time Spread Betting on the
6th race. A Twin Win Pool is run on the 6th race. For Time
Spread Betting numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 are offered, all with a
time handicap subtracted from the horses` final time, except the "scratch
horse" that runs without any time subtraction. (It should be said Twin
Win Betting will likely debut down the road a bit after bettors,
hopefully, take to Time Spread Betting. Second generation "add-ons" might
be Perfectas and Trifectas, Twin Win, Twin Perfecta, Twin Trifecta, etc.)

[0073] Twin Win Tickets (1-1, 2-2, 3-3, 4-4, 5-5, 6-6, 7-7, 8-8) could
also be offered--a mere eight possible tickets. But to cash the bettor
would have to select the winner of the Time Spread Betting pool and the
winner of the conventional win pool. And, of course, they would have to
be the same horse. Most of the time (871/2%) this would not happen and
the entire Twin Pin pool would carry over. (Or perhaps 1/2 to 3/4 would
carry over with balance paid to tickets that had either the time spread
winner or the conventional race winner.) This is a "side bet" or "Bonus
Round".

[0074] In Time Spread Betting the conventional betting favorite horse will
have many more conventional wins than he/she will have Time Spread
"covers". Conversely, in Time Spread Betting the conventional betting
longest shot horse in the conventional win pool will have very few wins
but many more covers in the Time Spread pool. So in the Twin Win
carryover we will see, at exemplary Maywood track for example, many
1-1's, 1-2's, 1-3's, 1-4's, 1-5's, 1-6's, 1-7's, 1-8's, but far fewer
8-5's, 8-6's, 8-7's, 8-8's. Overall, more favorites than longshots in the
Twin Win when it hits (keeping in mind, only 1-1 would hit the carryover
Type A), but still much higher odds than any ordinary two horse bet
(double, perfecta), and needing the same horse winning both pools or
carryover will result in very high odds for this rich paying Bonus
Bet/Side Bet.

[0075] Anyone may bet into any pool. Casinos usually let persons place
side bets at table games without wagering on the regular bet . . . though
not always. Slots do require regular bets to participate in Bonus Rounds.

[0076] Another way to offer Twin Win Betting could be to offer
combinations. (For example: 1-1, 2-1, 3-1, 4-1; 1-2, 2-2, 3-2, 4-2; 1-3,
2-3, 3-3, 4-3; 1-4; 2-4; 3-4; 4-4; etc.) One option is a 64 possible twin
win. The winner could be paid as any perfecta but if no "doubles" hit
(1-1, 2-2, 3-3, 4-4, 5-5, 6-6, 7-7, 8-8), possibly 25% of pool would be
carried over until there is a twin win. Payoffs on twin perfecta or twin
trifectas could result in a very large carryover.

[0077] Dead heats may be determined by the times--not photo--for time
spread pool only and its pari-mutuel payouts. (The conventional pool will
have its placing for purse and pari-mutuel payouts determined by the
photo--not the time.) Because a harness horse travels about 51/2 inches
in 1/100th of a second . . . there will be more dead heats for Win
(or Pers 2nd or Tris 3rd) because, should horses be within 5 or
so inches of each other in raw or "adjusted time", they will be (could
be) awarded the same adjusted times. One solution is to pay multiple
winners.

[0078] There is no need for the judges to concern themselves about
disqualifications. The horse could be placed in the conventional race
result where they believe he/she should be placed. But then we must award
an official adjusted time for that placed back horse. That time should be
1/100th second behind the horse's raw time that the disqualified
horse is placed behind. (It would always be slower than the actual raw
time the offending horse actually ran.) Then any time handicap applicable
can be applied to the offending horse's new (judges') raw time. This
would then be the time the offending horse ends up with for betting
purposes in the Time Spread race. The official order of finish for purse
and conventional/raw place would be behind the horse judges place it at
in the conventional race.

[0079] One example can be explained in a conventional win pool also having
Time Spread win pool. Horse #1 wins, but interfered with horse #4. In the
conventional win pool, #1 finished first and #4 finished third. Judges
new placing is:

[0080] #2 (who was 2nd)--raw time 1:58:26--1st place

[0081] #4 (who was 3rd)--raw time 1:58:40--2nd place [0082] #1
(who was 1st)--raw time 1:58:03 disallowed--3rd place [0083]
(1:58:41 new official raw time for TSB wagering purposes) Now apply
handicaps:

[0096] The inventor herein published separate articles on certain aspects
of the invention. More specifically, two articles were published in the
November 2009 and December 2009 publication Mid-America Standardbred and
Harness News and a third unpublished article was submitted with
provisional application No. 61/394,666 (the priority application hereto).
The substance of each of those articles is reproduced below.

[0097] Football Season . . . take the points? Lay the points? Hey, it
doesn't matter. Basically you will win about half your bets . . . and
lose half. You lay 11-10 so you end up losing, but a lot of entertainment
. . . for your approximately 5% loss over time. And you really don't need
to handicap the teams. Too bad you can't do that with horse racing. Or
can you? More correctly will you? If Balmoral/Maywood likes the idea
shortly you will. Here is how it will go. Take a win bet at Maywood on a
Thursday night perhaps. [0098] #1 Handicap--0.09 second [0099] #2
Handicap--0 (the scratch horse) [0100] #3 Handicap--0.16 second [0101] #4
Handicap--0.20 second [0102] #5 Handicap--0.28 second [0103] #6
Handicap--0.39 second [0104] #7 Handicap --0.48 second [0105] #8
Handicap--0.69 second

[0106] (Harness horses going 1:54 mile cover a length in 0.18 seconds. A
length is about 81/3 feet. A 1:54 miles is 114 seconds. Divide 114 by
0.18 32 6331/3×81/3 feet=5277.78 feet. Close enough to 5280 feet.)
Now bet into the WIN pool. Use your program to handicap . . . or just
stab one. IF . . . and this IF is the key, the track handicapper can make
a good "time handicap" then the pari-mutuel odds might look like this;

[0107] Because we are pari-mutuel all odds won't be the same as Football
lines (11-10) but subject to the bettors opinions we could get a final
odds as above or if the track handicapper is off . . . there could be a
more normal board. But the idea is to level the handicapping field by
having the track handicapper even the field. The track must record time
to the 100th second . . . for each and every horse. The "corrected time
finish" is posted subtracting the handicap from each horse's actual time.
Fastest placed first, next fastest second, etc. Sometimes dead heats.
Eventually after the public is used to this and likes it. Perfectas and
trifectas. I call it "Length Spread Betting". The program should show an
information chart that gives approximate lengths a time handicap
represents. 0.18 sec.=1 length ( 8/13 feet at a 1:54 pace). But time
decides the winner. This pool can be offered alongside traditional pools,
if allowed, experimenting with a reduced takeout in this pool as well as
the conventional win pool should be tried. More to come. "Did Your Horse
Cover?" by Richard A. Herbert, M D (Mid-America Standardbred & Harness
News--November 2009).

[0108] Bringing "point spread betting" to racing is an attempt to provide
racing with a wager that, while completely conventional in pari-mutuel
structure, creates a level playing field between form handicappers and a
younger generation racing has nearly completely lost. But to succeed it
needs some help from the powers that be. We need a bet that a customer
can make and be at pretty even chance with everyone else. But we can't
forget our horse players either. This is it.

[0109] While their advantage in reading a form seems less important--maybe
they too will find a niche in this type of a bet. Let's look at an
ordinary race with ordinary betting. Perhaps a good horse draws the rail
and likes the front. In ordinary racing he might go off 4-5. But with
"L.S.B." he might be spotting the other seven horses in the race from
0.13 seconds (approximately 3/4 length) to 1.19 seconds (approximately
61/2 lengths). Under the conditions he may only draw 10 or so percent of
the total win pool and go off at odds of 7-1 and pay $16.40. True, to
cash he must overcome the "weight"--lengths--all calculated in time
handicaps. But every week in the NFL the best teams are handicapped by up
to 14-15-16 points--and they only pay 10-11 odds! Here we can take
advantage of what once gave racing the advantage in gambling--odds. We
need to get the payoffs up--yet still offer our old handicappers
something to shoot for. Our new bettor will be happy with a bunch of
"appetizing" possible wagers--and they won't have to handicap. They can
spend their time partying, eating, drinking, slapping their girls on
the--back and betting!

[0110] Now if you really want to launch this and get big pools, try this.
All one horse wagers commission 12% (this will be win wagering). All two
horse or race wagers (perfectas and doubles) 13%. All three horse or race
wagers (trifectas and pick three) 14%. All four horse or race wagers
(superfectas and pick four) 15%. All five horse or race wagers 16&. All
six 17%, etc.

[0111] Keep the take low! Out compete the penny slot. Even though racing,
even with simulcasting, is slower paced than slots, our bets are more:
$1, & $2 mostly as well as larger players making $100, $1,000 bets! We
have enough action and our bets--in this format--will allow for many new
customers and our players will like to compete into these pools with
them.

[0112] These races will be nearly fix proof. Anyone trying will have to
recruit most of the field and even then would look ridiculous and get
caught trying to orchestrate a timed handicap finish. Way too hard! They
will step on their money or be so obvious they will be handcuffed in the
paddock.

[0113] A couple of other things. Pay every place (except perhaps last) to
keep all entries trying to the end. We don't want the appearance of not
trying to taint the wagering. Then we need two or three or four excellent
trip handicappers to make handicap lines then have them reconciled into
one "official handicap." All types of racing can use this wagering form.
Below is an example of a perfecta pool with a 13% commission.

[0114] Of course, many races may have handicaps that don't cause such an
even split of the wagering pool--but those races may be just as
interesting to bet into. We just need a timer that does 1/100 of a
second. Let us know your thoughts.

[0115] To answer some early feedback: It was pointed out that the public
will not KNOW who won under the handicap system most of the time.
Precisely correct! You can't look upon this bet from the traditional list
horse player's viewpoint. I want all or most ticket holders to be in
anticipation of the "final result." It will be like five or six different
ticket holders "live in the photo." The new players will view this as
normal as slot players are routinely "told" by the machine if they won or
lost by the bells and whistles going off. And our horse players will see
it as being "live in the photo." Anticipation is a good thing to produce
when gambling. Don't worry about this--just try it "Length Spread
Betting" by Richard A. Herbert, M D (Mid-America Standardbred & Harness
News, December 2009).

[0116] A new name for Length Spread Betting was proposed by Maywood's Doc
Narutsky. I like it, it is even more descriptive in that we handicap this
wager via actual time--exact to 1/100th of a second--rather than the
"relative" concept of lengths (which vary in that faster horses cover any
given distance quicker than slower horses). Answering some more questions
and comments about Time Spread Betting. Paul Svendsen of Maywood, at a
meeting in November raised an interesting though. He wondered if a bettor
might feel a bit cheated when his horse covers the time handicap paying
6-1 for example, but also wins the race outright paying 22-1 for example
in the conventional win pool. That brought me to the subject of this
final article on the introduction of "T.S.B.".

[0117] I pointed out a couple of things. A horse, not the conventional
favorite, will cover perhaps 4-10 times for each outright win he garners.
Conversely, the conventional race favorite will outright win perhaps 4-10
times for each T.S.B. race he covers. In this statement one begins to see
the purpose of T.S.B. We level the playing field between novices and
experienced handicappers. The only purpose for T.S.B. that is designed
into it. Sure a side effect might be that experienced handicappers might
find value in many of the T.S.B. races and be able to get 5-1 on a 4-5
shot from the rail, or cash at 7-1 on a 40-1 conventional bet horse
leaving from the eight hole.

[0118] I then revealed what I had in mind for one "cheated bettor." First,
he was always free to wager something on "his horse" in the conventional
pool. Many experienced sports bettors "hedge" by both wagering on their
team at the point spread AND the "money line." Sometimes they even
"double hedge" by betting both teams in a game--one taking the
points--and the other laying no points but laying odds--say 2-1. For
example, they may bet $50 to win $25 on team A (no points involved) while
simultaneously wagering $55 to win $50 on team B getting 5 points. Should
the game end with team A winning 21-17 they win both bets, plus $75. If
team B should outright win the game they would lose $50 and win $50
breaking even while if team A blows out team B they would win $25 and
lose $55, netting a minus $30. So the three possible results would be
+$75, 0, -$30. Given proper conditions many astute sports bettors make a
living hedging. Horse racing with 8-12 starters each race provide many
more opportunities to hedge given T.S.B. One can certainly bet the
"scratch horse" only in the conventional pool while betting a horse with
a time handicap in the T.S.B. pool, cashing both bets while he hedges his
bet on the favorite. So here we see while simultaneously "leveling the
field" for the novices racing so desperately needs--we also open up a new
avenue for the experienced handicapper to exploit. Since the track makes
its end on the volume of money bet we have, with T.S.B., a win-win-win
situation.

[0119] The final part I held back to now. I would also offer another sort
of hedge for our "cheated bettor." I call it "Twin Win Betting." After
T.S.B. is introduced I would offer this companion wager. It is like the
Bonus Round in slots or the Side Bet in casino table games. It can be
offered in two forms.

[0120] To win, you must pick one of these eight offered tickets (of course
you can bet all eight if you like). Then if the very same horse is
declared the winner of the conventional win pool and the T.S.B. win pool
and you have those twin win numbers you hit the carryover. Much tougher
proposition than it seems. For example, say the favorite wins 40% in the
conventional pool. then in the T.S.B. he might win 13% of the time. This
means (0.4)(0.13)=0.052--a bit over 5% the favorite might trigger the
twin win. All the others combined might trigger it another 7-8%. So in
total it will carry over 7-9 times on average before being hit.

[0121] To win you simply must pick the winner of the conventional win pool
and the T.S.B. win pool. Should you have a ticket as in the boxes above,
1-1, 2-2, 3-3, 4-4, 5-5, 6-6, 7-7, or 8-8 AND those numbers win both win
pools, you hit the carryover. If any other number wins, the pool divides
as any pari-mutuel pool with 20-50% pulled and carried over until a twin
win triggers.

[0122] I like form [A] best, but both will serve as a hedge for our
skilled handicappers, or as a big jackpot to be handicapped for, or as a
way to let novices in on the fun without being at great disadvantage to
experienced players. This form of wagering does not even require the
novice to Buy a program!

[0123] After a time T.S.B. perfectas and twin win perfectas should be
introduced. The carryover here will be enormous as the chances of pairing
say a conventional pool perfecta of 4-1 with the identical result of 4-1
in the T.S.B. pool will happen about once every hundred or more races. Go
to trifectas, and over a couple of years, a pool could build up to pay
$50,000,000 or more.

[0124] How do we launch these new bets? Start with prizes and use
qualifiers and free buffets. Market it and publicize it so the public
gets curious. When real betting starts give out free $1 vouchers (I would
standardize this as a $1 bet) for several weeks to get the players in.
then go to people that never come to the races. Given them free buffets
and free $1 vouchers. You can't just put it in the program ice cold. We
need non-regulars coming in to play it and you have to give them a reason
to come. Free buffet for these groups with prizes, etc. New blood. Our
regulars will play if the pools are there. Then simulcast the pools. Net
pool pricing will be O.K. (Unpublished article by Richard A. Herbert,
submitted with the priority provisional application.)

[0125] The foregoing disclosure of specific embodiments is intended to be
illustrative of the broad concepts comprehended by the invention.